• New Patreon Tier and Early Access Content available. If you would like to support AVForums, we now have a new Patreon Tier which gives you access to selected news, reviews and articles before they are available to the public. Read more.

Human Rights..is it just me?

Deadringers

Distinguished Member
BBC News - Philip Lawrence's killer Learco Chindamo arrested
So the guy who killed the teacher in 1995 has now been let out and is up to his old tricks again.
Basic break down is:
Kills someone at aged 15.
Goes to prison.
Come out.
Starts robbing people.

Fantastic! :thumbsup:

This really gets me:
A judge ruled that he cannot be deported to Italy, where he was born, because it would breach his human rights as he has spent most of his life in Britain.
So how does that work out?
He takes a father of 3’s life. This guy is now dead, will never walk the planet again. His kids will never see him again.

The guy who did it gets 15 years in jail.

Comes out at 30.
Starts committing crimes again!

But he still has human rights!?
How the **** can an animal like that deserve “human rights”.
He took away someone else’s human rights when he was 15.
Why does he deserve any?
Just don’t get the justice system…

can anyone give a reasonable explanation as to why they are given human rights?
 

Solomon Grundy

Distinguished Member
I guess the law looks at each crime on an individual basis when it comes to trials rather than looking at the person overall. This guy will probably commit more crime for another decade or so, making people miserable and then end up running a Government backed "Community Program" for scumbag kids in a room with a tennis table and pool table to keep them off the street telling everyone how he has "turned his life around" and that "if I can get just one kid to turn away from a life of crime it will be worth it" etc. etc.

Just take him out back and shoot him, give everyone some peace and quiet so we don't have to see him on local news in 15 years time with a sob story and a load of loopy liberals telling us how marvellous he is to have "made a difference".
 

ldoodle

Distinguished Member
can anyone give a reasonable explanation as to why they are given human rights?

Yes. The entire justice system, especially the HR council, is made up of criminals.

It is the only explanation as to why criminals get more rights than their victims and families.
 
Last edited:

mikeclark007

Well-known Member
Just take him out back and shoot him, give everyone some peace and quiet so we don't have to see him on local news in 15 years time with a sob story and a load of loopy liberals telling us how marvellous he is to have "made a difference".

+1. Well said
 

wolverine73

Active Member
The state of the prison service makes me fume.

Life should me life - end of.

Prisoners who have commited a crime should NOT get playstations, Table tennis, televisions, gyms and great meals 3 times a day.

My opinion - though very harsh - is that you should be locked up, on your own in a cell 10 by 6 with just a bed and a bucket for 22 hours per day, the other 2 hours are for exercising in a yard, that means running or walking - no bloody weights or 'extras'.

Meals consist of bread and water - thats it

Lets see how many offend/reoffend if they know that this is what faces them.

Human rights - ********! If you want to be treated right and live on the outside then don't beat on old woman etc............

*starts to simmer down*
 

Garrett

Moderator
Lot of this human right are clap trap, think there have been other cases of people committing acts of terrorism or inciting people to commit them yet we cant deport them as it would be unsafe to send them back home. Seems it OK to infringe our human rights and have the country unsafe for innocent people yet these ungrateful hate mongers who are well off here yet want to destroy it for others are protected.

I could not believe one of the channels last night gave someone the soap box to call our laws and said it was all wrong and was promoting chopping off of hand for theft and capital punishment for rape. How many case have come to light that the claim of rape been made up to land someone in trouble.

Seems they want it both ways human rights for them but not for others.
 
Last edited:

Deadringers

Distinguished Member
let's get it right.

it is **** to be locked up and not able to do the things you want to do...so it is not all good for them "in there locked up".

however, I agree that why should they have any acess to the luxuries of life when the rest of us have to pay hard earnt money on them?

so I go to work, I save up, I do not beat people to death or rob anyone.
I pay my own bills and way in life.

Why can I not get a Government paid xbox or set of weights?
 

Pack Dude

Active Member
We have human rights partly to protect us from the government. If the powers that be can pick and choose who they apply to then whats the point in having them?

Why can I not get a Government paid xbox or set of weights?

Good news! You are equally entitled to a Government paid xbox and set of weights.
 

Dextur

Distinguished Member
Take a life in the fashion he did, you either pay with your life or spend a true life sentence until the day you die in a 6x4.

Come the revolution and my enevitable dictatorship, crime will dry up overnight.
 

Deadringers

Distinguished Member
if inside a convicted murderer is charged with another crime, say murder, would you feel it's right to remove that person's right to fair trial?

also, has chindamo actually been convicted of theft yet?

huh not sure I understand?

so a guy is in prison doing time for a previous murder...
he then murders another person...
and you are asking if I believe he should have a fair trial?
 

Citizen J

Well-known Member
I remember whilst at university we were having a debate about the validity of the human rights law in regards to western society. There idea proclaimed by the lecturer was the human rights act largely has become too diluted and hollow and isn’t applicable in western societies. Although this statement inevitably oversimplifies the complexities of the act, in essence I understand and agree with its core framework.
Look at examples in Iran where trials are completely arbitrary, no proper legal precedence, total disregard for women and individualism. China has an appalling human rights record and there isn’t enough done to stop the complete and utter disregard for implementing basic human rights principles over there.

Then we have the UK where people are given so many basic rights compared to other societies in is unbelievable. All can vote and there is no threat of violence depending on who you vote for, right to protest, right to strike, right to be educated irrespective of what race, sex, or sexual orientation you belong to; the list goes on.

Then we have to pander to ridiculous hollow passages in the human right law that completely fail to grasp the essence of its own statements. Examples as the OP presented above are a disgrace. Why doesn’t the human rights brigade go and enforce human rights in China, Iran, and Somalia where basic rights do no exist? Ridiculous if you ask me.
 

KingFisher2010

Active Member
huh not sure I understand?

so a guy is in prison doing time for a previous murder...
he then murders another person...
and you are asking if I believe he should have a fair trial?

no, the person is charged with a crime that occurred prior to their conviction and incarceration.

and also again, has chindamo actually been convicted of theft yet?


Why doesn’t the human rights brigade go and enforce human rights in China, Iran, and Somalia where basic rights do no exist? Ridiculous if you ask me.

what is ridiculous is you asking why this "human rights brigade" don't go and enforce human rights in china etc.

and how exactly would they go and "enforce" rights there, eh? you can't just go and tell them to do it or else. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

Citizen J

Well-known Member
and how exactly would they go and "enforce" rights there, eh? you can't just go and tell them to do it or else. :rolleyes:

It is more a figure of speech. I.E why is it that places such as China and Iran who have an abysmal human right record do not implement basic rights. Yet here ex prisoners who re offends cannot be deported as it breaches their human rights.

Doesn't seem right to me.
 

KingFisher2010

Active Member
it gives us a platform to preach the moral high ground and pressure nations like china and iran into reviewing the rights they afford their citizens.

just because they treat the public like scum doesn't mean we should follow suit, and i'd rather have the human rights act abused by few than not have any at all.

it's all fair and well when we get tedious, clichéd richard littlejohn-style quips like "criminals get more rights than the victims and families", but misguided remarks usually come from those who only pay attention to the high profile cases, which the right-wing press jump upon to promote their political agenda. try looking at the other, less public cases where companies, governments, police forces and such have tried to screw over the little man and failed. these are the examples of where the human rights act has shown its worth yet are mainly ignored.
 
Last edited:

Pecker

Distinguished Member
I fully support human rights - yes, even for criminals.

But for crying out loud, this is the sort of thing that gives human rights a bad name.

How can you infringe someone's human rights by returning them to their own country (the one where they hold citizenship) unless they are somehow in danger there?

I sometimes think these decisions are made by those within the system who don't agree with human rights, just to dicredit the idea. Does anyone think this sort of thing is what was intended when the law was debated?

The concept of human rights are not the problem - it's the often idiotic implementation.

Rights must be balanced. No one is due any right if it infringes those of others.

Steve W
 

sparkie1984

Distinguished Member
Take a life in the fashion he did, you either pay with your life or spend a true life sentence until the day you die in a 6x4.

Come the revolution and my enevitable dictatorship, crime will dry up overnight.

must be the name :D

as i have exactly the same view as you!!!!!

although i think the likes of paedos should be put in a room with the kids parents. thats justice (well for the parents anyway)

as you say, take a life then you lose yours. no not in death but in prison. no quibbles.

no xbox, no perks, just a crappy dull life in prison to look forward to :suicide:
 

LanceR

Distinguished Member
kingfisher and quest, how about you actually read what pecker said?
 

KingFisher2010

Active Member
i've read it and if i've misunderstood something then i apologise. however, i have asked pecker a question to clear up any confusion, there's really no need for you to get snotty about it though especially when it wasn't even your post.
 
Last edited:

Tempest

Distinguished Member
must be the name :D

as i have exactly the same view as you!!!!!

although i think the likes of paedos should be put in a room with the kids parents. thats justice (well for the parents anyway)

as you say, take a life then you lose yours. no not in death but in prison. no quibbles.

no xbox, no perks, just a crappy dull life in prison to look forward to :suicide:


For for the sake of argument: :D

What age difference/ages do you deem to be correct to brand someone a Pedo who should be locked in a room with parents as you say?

On the killing someone point. Is that a blanket policy for anyone who kills another human being?
 

The latest video from AVForums

Guardians of the Galaxy Xmas Special, Strange World, Bones and All, and Cabinet of Dr Caligari in 4K
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom